In Syria - How to "Liberate" a Pro-Army City?

July 25, 2012 - A pivotal conflict is unfolding in northern Syria in the city of Aleppo - one told with two narratives. For the Western media, speaking on behalf of US foreign policy and the corporate-financier interests behind both their "journalism" and the subversion of Syria, the "Battle for Aleppo" constitutes brave "pro-democracy" fighters rising up in the streets of the ancient city to do battle with invading "regime thugs." This despite a year and a half of reporting Aleppo as admittedly a pro-government bastion.

Image: An approximation of areas where fighting has been taking place in Aleppo, Syria. Clearly during the initial offensive by the FSA, they came in from 2 of the city's main highways, both leading to the Turkish-Syrian border. It appears that a large number of fighters have been trapped inside the center of the city, surrounded by Syrian military forces. This was not an "uprising" but rather an invasion by armed militants from either near, or across the Turkish-Syrian border. It is unclear whether a significant number of additional militants are on their way.

....

An Invasion, Not an Uprising

The second narrative is discerned not from official Syrian government talking points, but from a more critical examination of the Western media's own reports, which exposes what is instead, indeed a pro-Syrian Army, pro-Syria city being overrun by so-called "Free Syrian Army" militants pouring in from two specific points - Aleppo's northeast facing Azaz, and Aleppo's northwest facing Bab al-Hawa. Militants emanating from these directions come from areas directly across from the Turkish border.

We know this, because BBC and other Western networks rode in with the militants on their way to Aleppo. One report, by BBC's Ian Pannell, describes how he came in on just such a convoy. Clearly, these are not "sons of Aleppo" rising up.

It appears that the operation in Damascus was expected to last longer and cause more chaos amongst the ranks of the Syrian military. It also looks like a large psychological operation planned by NATO was attempted, but failed, or pushed back at the very least - one involving the seizing of Syrian broadcasting and replacing it with false reports of the government's imminent demise. The lightning fast defeat of FSA militants in Damascus lent the Syrian people and their army a morale boost, instead of the psychological defeat NATO had intended to deal.

With Damascus secured and slowly returning back to normal, all eyes have fixated on Aleppo. The Western media is now portraying security operations in the city as "brutal" with verified lies of "Russian-made MIGs" "bombing" civilian populations being spread. With FSA militants seemingly trapped in the center of the city, and with the Syrian Army allegedly bringing in reinforcements, the Western media has attempted to portray what was a militant infiltration of the city, as instead, an invasion of Syrian military forces against "city defenders."

How to "Liberate" a Pro-Army, Pro-Syrian City - Use Terrorism, Brutality, Intimidation

Also discerned from the Western media's own reports is just how the FSA is trying to "liberate" Aleppo. BBC's Ian Pannell claims militants are attempting to "extend their control" while "seeking revenge." His narrative is accompanied by video footage of FSA militants rounding up what he claims are "suspected shabiha," kicking them and firing weapons at their feet. The fate of these unarmed, terrorized men is never revealed by BBC, and Pannell excuses the FSA's behavior by claiming, "there is little justice on either side."

Image: From BBC's Ian Pannell
- young men "suspected" of being "Shabiha" are rounded up as the FSA
"seeks revenge." BBC fails categorically to explain how NATO-backed
terrorists can "liberate" a city that is admittedly pro-government - but
it appears it will be done through terrorism, brutality, mass murder,
and intimidation.

....

CNN also adds inadvertently contradictory facts to their fallacious narrative. In an article titled, "Faces of the Free Syrian Army," we are treated with a grossly unsubstantiated narrative, seemingly meant to counter evidence reported on by outlets such as French intellectual Thierry Meyssan's VoltaireNet. VoltaireNet's article, "Who is Fighting in Syria?" reveals that the FSA's ranks consist of mostly radicalized gangs, many not even Syrian. Further more, the article points out that the Syrian Army is conscripted from amongst the nation's citizens. It is a "people's army."

CNN's article, despite attempting to allay fears that the FSA consists of foreign terrorists, still admits:

Meanwhile, residents of
the village where the Syrian Falcons were headquartered said there were
fighters of several North African nationalities also serving with the
brigade's ranks.

A volunteer Libyan
fighter has also told CNN he intends to travel from Turkey to Syria
within days to add a "platoon" of Libyan fighters to armed movement.

Clearly, foreign-armed militants storming a city, many of whom are not even citizens of Syria, is not a "liberation," but rather an invasion. Especially when these foreign fighters are facing an army conscripted from the Syrian people themselves.

And as with any invasion, a degree of "shock and awe" is required to create the necessary fear and panic in order to subjugate the invaded. The atrocities BBC alludes to reaffirm reports from both Human Rights Watch and the UN describing widespread war crimes carried out by the FSA. This, above all else, is how they "take" and "hold" territory, especially in areas where the Syrian Army enjoys widespread support, like in Aleppo.